Rethinking Churchill and the Allied warmongers





World War II, we know on good authority, was unnecessary, the authority being none other than Winston Churchill. By unnecessary Churchill meant that if the Allies' appeasement of Hitler hadn't taken place earlier, the war wouldn't have to have been to fought later.

Now, in this country at least, a current of opinion is gaining strength that stands Churchill on his head. It wasn't appeasement that brought about the disaster of the conflict, but warmongering on the part of the Allied leaders, Churchill first and foremost among them.

The new revisionism makes no excuses for Hitler, but it sees the war through a lens of moral relativism: Yes, the Nazis were evil, but so were the Allies, whose leaders were mendacious, committed unspeakable atrocities and hoodwinked the public into believing that the war was a noble one, fought on behalf of decency and against an evil more colossal than any previous evil in human history.

For those of us, including myself, who have long believed that the Allied war effort was indeed noble, it might seem that such a point of view could only emanate from the dank quarters of some lunatic fringe, perhaps holed up in a Rocky Mountain redoubt and eating conspiracy theories for breakfast.

But on the contrary, the view seems to be the province of entirely respectable and thoughtful people of literary bent. The most visible proponent of the unnecessary war theory is the novelist Nicholson Baker, an accomplished, gentle and entirely civilized man, whose book "Human Smoke" has made him a darling of leftist critics of the American role in the world.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Randll Reese Besch - 5/25/2008

Could have stopped the war from happening if they would have enforced the Versiall Treaty when Hitler and company re-armed and moved into Austia. Stopping them with vast force and even temporary occupation would have broken the Nazi hold and stopped them. Even to arresting the Nazi leaders and disolving the NSDAP party could have stopped the mass destruction and mass murder. But they didn't,let Hitler take his first tentative step into Austria then get the Sudetnland then finally invaded Poland,with Russia starting the wider war in 1939.Then the killing of the unwanted scape goats increased in earnest. All told ~6M Jews and 9-10M others. (Romany, homosexuals, communists,socialists,occultists etc.) Added to the 20 million killed from all of the fighting all over the world.


William Mandel - 5/25/2008

I am Jewish, not a Zionist, and bitterly opposed to Israel's treatment of Palestinians. I am glad to be alive at age 91. Had I been a European Jew, and resident in the immense expanse of that continent, from the English Channel to the Volga River, with 400,000,000 people, that Hitler controlled until the USSR beat him back, I would have been killed by the Nazis before living to thirty. While Hitler did kill 6,000,000 Jews solely on the basis of their ethnicity, the rest of us survived thanks to his having been defeated. Hitler also killed about a million Gypsies, all that he could get his hands on, just because of their ethnicity.
Never mind the kind of civilization
Hitler would have imposed on Europe (few remember that he planned to cross the Atlantic to Brazil and ultimately to conquer the Americas), World War II was the Good War for having saved two ethnicities from extermination by genocide.

Subscribe to our mailing list